Search for: "G.L."
Results 481 - 500
of 546
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2009, 9:30 am
” G.L. c. 266, § 30(2 [read post]
28 Sep 2007, 12:53 pm
Not even in the context of civil restraining orders issued to protect people from domestic violence under G.L. c. 290A is the prohibition of "contact" understood in such a strictly formalistic manner. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 11:51 am
This is also a violation of G.L. c. 269 but under subsection 10(h). [read post]
27 May 2016, 6:10 am
This post examines an opinion from the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts,Suffolk: Commonwealth v. [read post]
25 Jan 2019, 11:45 am
§ 1396a(a)(8); G.L. c. 118E, § 48. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 12:00 am
Several new faculty members have joined the Brown School and the School of Law at Washington University in St. [read post]
18 May 2011, 7:13 pm
-G.L. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 8:30 am
On December 13, 2021, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued its long-awaited decision determining that the Massachusetts Independent Contractor Statute, G.L. c. 149, § 148B (“Independent Contractor Statute”), which establishes the three-pronged “ABC” test used to classify workers as independent contractors or employees – and provides for a rebuttable presumption that workers are employees unless the purported… [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 2:31 pm
G.L., 191 N.J. 596, 609 (2007). [read post]
5 Mar 2011, 8:42 pm
” “Matter” is defined in G.L. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 6:20 am
As we discussed in that resource page, Massachusetts G.L. c. 231 Section 60B, establishes the requirement for a tribunal for malpractice cases against healthcare providers. [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 9:23 am
Gillette alleged that the former employees misappropriate trade secrets and other confidential information to develop a wet-shaving razor for the benefit of their new employer, ShaveLogic.ShaveLogic counterclaimed, alleging that Gillette filed its lawsuit in bad faith.Gillette moved to dismiss, arguing that its filing of the lawsuit was petitioning activity protected by the anti-SLAPP statute, G.L. c. 231, section 59H, and was protected by the litigation privilege. [read post]
26 May 2017, 1:19 pm
Klemm, 446 Mass. 572, 578 (2006) the Court noted: “General Laws c. 214, § 1C, thus extends to employees and students protection that is not otherwise available under G.L. c. 151B and c. 151C; it does not duplicate the relief provided by those statutes. [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 9:23 am
ShaveLogic counterclaimed, alleging that Gillette filed its lawsuit in bad faith.Gillette moved to dismiss, arguing that its filing of the lawsuit was petitioning activity protected by the anti-SLAPP statute, G.L. c. 231, section 59H, and was protected by the litigation privilege. [read post]
7 May 2011, 3:05 am
G.L., 191 N.J. 596, 605 (2007). [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 9:23 am
ShaveLogic counterclaimed, alleging that Gillette filed its lawsuit in bad faith.Gillette moved to dismiss, arguing that its filing of the lawsuit was petitioning activity protected by the anti-SLAPP statute, G.L. c. 231, section 59H, and was protected by the litigation privilege. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 2:35 am
The SJC, however, cited to a Massachusetts statute (G.L. c. 276, § 1) that was enacted to provide more protection against searches and seizures then does the U.S. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 7:27 am
The court found that this was a violation of G.L. c. 138, Section 69 (discussed above), as the bar owners knew or should have known they were serving intoxicated persons. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 11:01 am
Under that framework, the defendant assert[ed] that, to provide constitutionally effective assistance, counsel must warn clients about consequences of sex offender registration when they are considering whether to plead guilty to a ‘sex offense’ as defined in G.L. c.6, §178C. [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 8:53 am
76 would amend G.L. c. 272, § 107(b) and would make it a crime to knowingly distribute visual material where: The material depicts an identifiable person who is nude, partially nude, or engaged in sexual conduct; The distribution would cause a reasonable person to suffer harm; The defendant distributes the material with an intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten or coerce the victim or distributes the… [read post]
